Hard to see how Len can avoid finally cashing on a ROTW, though he is using an unecessary horse (4 in a 6 horse field). But what\'s with picking a horse that just ran a huge new top first out for a move-up guy-- this is sheets theory?
TGJB,
Funny you mentioned that. I have watched his weekly plays for about 3 months now, and he has been awful. A couple of his regulars have tried to \"retrofit\" his words into winning picks after the fact, but he really has been awful. But hey, we all go streaks in this game where sometimes there are long breaks between drinks of water, but when I read his play last night, it smelled of somebody who knows they haven\'t posted anything remotely close in 3 months. I can honestly say that with all the dumb bets I have made in my life, I have never boxed 4 horses in a 6 horse race......
I think Santa Teresita is solid bet against, but I also think she won\'t be as short as expected, as we can all see that bad dirt race and solid synthetic form. With Len picking against her, she might actually win, the way he has been going.....
Jimbo--
1-- If I didn\'t like the first two favorites, or if the favorite I\'m throwing out is 3/5, I might go 4 deep.
2-- I actually like the longshot he didn\'t use more than the slow one he did use. I can\'t see using that one at all.
3-- On his picks, it\'s really worse than that, because he spreads so much (a few weeks ago he said because his pick was going to be odds-on he would only use it \"mainly\" on top). That means his return on any one he actually \"hits\" will be diluted-- he probably has to hit one out of three to break even.
4-- Betting strategy aside, Len is a very good handicapper, that\'s not his problem. The problem is the data-- prime example being the McGlaughlin filly that won last week. On TG she was off a pair and definitely better than even money to win the race-- on Rag she was off a big new top, according to what Len wrote.
He didn\'t hit one after all.
I hear you on the data and obviously you know the man better than I do,but I don\'t consider him a good handicapper. I have read too many \"rundowns\" on his board where he had \"reads\" on horses where he talks about \"1/2 point conditioning moves\". He is making handicapping decisions based on a level of precision that doesn\'t exist. I believe it comes from the \"drinking your own kool-aid\" syndrome. In this case, believing that his figures came down from Mt. Sinai on tablets.....
But just one man\'s opinion...
He didn\'t hit one after all.
I hear you on the data and obviously you know the man better than I do,but I don\'t consider him a good handicapper. I have read too many \"rundowns\" on his board where he had \"reads\" on horses where he talks about \"1/2 point conditioning moves\". He is making handicapping decisions based on a level of precision that doesn\'t exist. I believe it comes from the \"drinking your own kool-aid\" syndrome. In this case, believing that his figures came down from Mt. Sinai on tablets.....
But just one man\'s opinion...
Jim,
You mean you don\'t believe that someone can measure the performance of a horse within 20 inches of a previous effort.Come on Jim, have a kool aid or two.
Mike
Len-- two weeks in a row with the move-up guys? That\'s sheet theory?